Citation Nr: 0812902 Decision Date: 04/18/08 Archive Date: 05/01/08 DOCKET NO. 05-40 474 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Nashville, Tennessee THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for skin cancer, to include as secondary to exposure to ionizing radiation. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Tennessee Department of Veterans' Affairs ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Simone C. Krembs, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from January 1943 to January 1946. This appeal comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from an April 2005 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) that denied the veteran's claim for service connection for skin cancer, to include as secondary to exposure to ionizing radiation. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center in Washington, D.C. REMAND The veteran contends his skin cancer is the result of exposure to ionizing radiation while stationed in Japan as part of the occupational forces. The record reflects that the veteran was stationed aboard the USS Euryale for the period from September 1945 through January 1946, when the ship was stationed in Japan, as a part of the occupational forces. It has been determined that the veteran was present in the "hottest" spot in the hypocenter, or in the downwind fallout area, for the period from October 17, 1945, to October 29, 1945. In October 2004, VA obtained a dose estimate based upon his exposure to ionizing radiation during the period from October 17, 1945, to October 29, 1945. Based upon that dose estimate, an advisory opinion was obtained in March 2005, in which it was determined that the veteran's skin cancer was not likely the result of his limited exposure to ionizing radiation for the period from October 17, 1945, to October 29, 1945. The veteran, however, contends that the October 2004 dose estimate was faulty in that it was not based upon an estimated exposure for the entire period during which he was stationed in the vicinity of Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The Board notes that while the veteran may, by regulation, only be considered a member of the "occupation forces" for the limited period from October 17, 1945, to October 29, 1945, the veteran's contention that he may have also been exposed to ionizing radiation during the entire period he was stationed in Japan seems reasonable. 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(d)(vi) (2007). For that reason, the Board concurs with the veteran that a more accurate dose estimate may be obtained if the entire period during which the veteran was stationed in Japan is taken into consideration. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain official ship records demonstrating the location of the USS Euryale for the period from September 1945 through January 1946. 2. Forward the record to the Under Secretary for Health for preparation of a dose estimate and obtaining an opinion as to whether the veteran's in- service exposure to ionizing radiation is as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) the causative factor for his development of skin cancer. The Under Secretary for Health should specifically prepare a dose estimate that takes into consideration both the period during which the veteran has been determined to have been present in the defined occupation areas, and any potential exposure resulting from his being stationed in Sesebo and Kure, Japan, from September 28, 1945 to January 12, 1945. The Under Secretary should fully explain the reasons for any discrepancies between these findings and those made in October 2004 by D. M. Schaeffer and the March 2005 advisory opinion. The rationale for all opinions must be provided. 3. Then, readjudicate the claim. If the decision remain adverse to the veteran, issue a supplemental statement of the case. Allow the appropriate time for response, then return the case to the Board. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter the Board is remanding. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board or the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2007). _________________________________________________ Harvey P. Roberts Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2007).